Save the [small laptops]
It seems a bunch of suckers who have fallen for Intel's marketing are rallying to save the term "netbook" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netbook) from an attempt by the owner of the registered trademark to protect their intellectual property. In case you didn't notice, I'm not exactly sympathetic to their mission, and here's why.
First, due to my disdain for patent trolls (http://sumocat.blogspot.com/2008/03/why-i-hate-patent-trolls.html), those who try to reserve the rights to ideas not inventions, I am highly supportive of the rights of those who create actual products, such as Psion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psion) and their netBook (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetBook). They didn't sit on an idea with no path to development. They built a product, gave it a name, and now they own it. And that product is a small, limited function notebook with wifi that came out more than a decade ago.
Second, Intel introduced the "netbook" form factor (http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/03/thoughts_on_netbooks.php) in part to derail the OLPC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLPC) project, which seeks to bring low-cost educational computers to children in third-world countries. In addition to that being a dick move, it also diminished OLPC's development of their innovative, tablet-style XO laptop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLPC_XO-1). And for what? Smaller mundane notebooks? Obviously, I cant support that.
Third, the guys at "save the [small laptops]" (http://www.savethenetbooks.com/) don't even have a decent argument. They claim "organic growth" of the term, even though Intel planted the seed and promoted its growth through marketing. Their claim on it as a descriptor fails because every notebook can access the 'net, which means the term offers no clear differentiation from standard notebooks. And their claim that a portmanteau somehow generalizes the term fails when you swap in the trademarked portmanteau "ThinkPad." Their footman tried twice to push that argument on me, and both times (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2009/02/17/save-the-netbook-campaign-is-over-the-top//comment-page-1#comment-17329) I swapped terms and they fit seamlessly.
Fourth, golden rule applies. If some big company tried to take the name "Build 52" (http://sumocat.blogspot.com/search/label/Build%2052) and apply it to a category of image map generators, I would f--- them up. Not in any real or legal sense, but through stern words with Links in Ink (http://sumocat.blogspot.com/search?q=%22Links+in+Ink%22) courtesy of the real Build 52 (http://www.markandtanya.us/scribbles/Build52.html).
So basically, Intel stepped on someone's trademark to crush a non-profit's attempt to bring innovative computers to poor children, a group that bought into that campaign is trying to keep it going with arguments that have no grounding in reality, and I can't fault Psion for standing up for their rights.
[+/-] Hide/Show Text
[+/-] Hide/Show Text
Labels: mobile tech
Save the [small laptops]
posted by Sumocat at 2/17/2009 09:44:00 PM
5 Comments:
Spot on. Just to add to the pot, people seem to miss the point that Psion brought out a "Nebook Pro" in very late 2003... surely that has a lifespan of a couple of years or more? I'm sick of reading that Psion abandoned Netbook in 2003 when that just isn't true!
By
Anonymous, at 2/18/2009 11:59:00 PM
Yep, that's another good point. There are reviews of the Pro well into 2004. If we're counting from when the product was discontinued, as opposed to introduced, it was at most four years later when Intel picked up the name. That's not a long enough span to consider a name abandoned.
By
Sumocat, at 2/19/2009 09:15:00 AM
The ThinkPad is an enforceable fanciful mark. It was created specifically to serve as a trademark because some engineer got the idea from looking at his leather notepad bearing the company tagline "Think", hence "ThinkPad", not "thinking notepad" as you claim - who knows where you got that idea from.
Your conspiracy theory doesn't hold water either because people were using the term netbook to describe the OLPC back in 2005 and again for Acer in 2007. Intel didn't get on the bandwagon until 2008, by which time the horse had well and truly bolted.
Anyway I hate to be the one to burst your bubble but while filing a Petition to Cancel Psion's mark we found that Dell had pegged us at the post. Not only that, but they added to our pleadings of abandonment and genericide a claim of fraud relating to a sworn declaration of use & incontestability made by a senior employee at Psion. Oops.
Psion never had a chance with this - they should have dusted off the blueprints and waltzed into the marketplace with the netbook's iPhone (yes, we agree it was that good). Too bad they've gone and pissed off the vast majority of the reviewers, in some case hitting them hard in the back pocket by cutting off their ad revenue.
FWIW you're probably the only person outside of Psion supporting them right now - even their own alumni and resellers are embarrassed by their recent antics.
Over and out.
STN
By
Save the Netbooks, at 2/19/2009 01:50:00 PM
You make a lot of claims, but you don't back them up. You claim the term's been in use since OLPC (One LAPTOP Per Child), but you don't point to any use. Support your argument and then I'll take it seriously. By contrast, I've already gone back through my two favorite mobile tech sites and found first "netbook" mentions in 2008.
http://jkontherun.com/page/50/?s=netbook
http://www.gottabemobile.com/tag/netbook/page/20
You want to argue against me, show me some data, or at least make a strong argument as Dell did with their petition. BTW, I already analyzed the petition and found its pivotal points, which I'll post here later. It can stand if not properly countered, but Dell is taking a big risk with the claim of genericness. Without evidence to prove the "netbook" term was genericized before 2008, they risk serious backlash. You want to be on the right side of this, find that evidence.
By
Sumocat, at 2/19/2009 02:46:00 PM
Oh wait, I did find an earlier mention of a netbook on Gizmodo. However, I wouldn't try to use it to support your case.
http://gizmodo.com/search/netbook/bydate/?refId=260&timerange=all
By
Sumocat, at 2/19/2009 02:55:00 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home